This page holds together a number of links to some of the posts/notes/codes which I have come to write over the years, whether at this blog, at iMechanica, or elsewhere.

The links are grouped together in different sections of the following headings:

- The most important document I ever wrote [ ↓ ]
- The most important series I ever wrote [ ↓ ]
- The most fundamental question I ever raised in mechanics [ ↓ ]
- My further thoughts/notings on diffusion [ ↓ ]
- The roots of the concept: “space” [ ↓ ]
- Physical referents of certain mathematical concepts [ ↓ ]

- Physical referents of ideas like locality, and the instantaneous action at a distance [ ↓ ]

- CFD code snippets in Python [ ↓ ]

- Book reviews [ ↓ ]

- Micro-level water resources engineering [ ↓ ]

- Academia [ ↓ ]

- Ancient Indian wisdom; philosophy of mind; spirituality [ ↓ ]

- Miscellaneous (mechanics-related topics) [ ↓ ]

- Miscellaneous (other topics) [ ↓ ]

01 January 2020, Pune.

## 1. The most important document I ever wrote:

** “An outline of the elements of a new approach to understanding quantum physics”**

Posted at iMechanica on 11th February 2019 [ ^ ]. The PDF document can be found at [^].

I call it the “outline” document for short. It presents an outline of a new approach to understanding QM, and to solving the measurement problem, which I have proposed. I showed how the nonlinearity necessary for solving the measurement problem can be had, but without introducing any extra variables to the Schrodinger equation.

(Top [ ↑ ] )

## 2. The most important series of blog posts I ever wrote:

In the year 2019, I wrote a ten-part series of posts covering my ideas concerning ontologies in physics. Here are the links, in the chronological order.

- Ontologies in physics—1: Newtonian mechanics [^]
- Ontologies in physics—2: Electromagnetic fields as understood by Faraday and Maxwell [^]
- Ontologies in physics—3: EM fields in terms of forces; space; and related ontological issues [^]
- Ontologies in physics—4: Minor changes in the ontology of EM force-fields. Understanding potential energy. [^]
- Ontologies in physics—5: Energy-based analysis of EM force-fields [^]
- Ontologies in physics—6: A basic problem: How the mainstream QM views the variables in Schrodinger’s equation [^]
- Ontologies in physics—7: To understand QM, you have to first solve yet another problem with the EM [^]
- Ontologies in physics—8: Correct view of the EM “V” in the Schrodinger equation. Necessity of aether. [^]
- Ontologies in physics—9: Derivation of Schrodinger’s equation: context, and essential steps [^]
- Ontologies in physics—10: Objects in QM. Aetherial fields in QM. Particle-in-a-box. [^]

(Top [ ↑ ] )

## 3. The most fundamental question I ever raised in mechanics:

**“Stress or strain: which one is more fundamental?”**

Published at iMechanica: [^]. This is the second most-read post at iMechanica—and, as far as posts on the *theoretical* topics are concerned, it is the *most-read* post—from among some 20,000+ threads at that forum!

iMechanica helped me gain a certain visibility, even acceptability as a peer. And it all began mostly with this post. … My more recent take on this post is here: [^].

(Top [ ↑ ] )

## 4. My further thoughts/notings on diffusion:

If you ask me the one result (among those actually published thus far) that I am most proud of, then I will have to say: the ideas explored in my paper on diffusion.

Here are a few posts, published at this blog on this topic, tracing some of the thoughts which occurred to me *after* publishing my conference paper.

**“A little more on my research on the diffusion equation”**

The papers I ran into. Useful references for the topic. [^]

**“Transient diffusion with compact support throughout—not just initially”**

Here I cover a question I asked at Math StackExchange [^]. It remains an open question till date. (I have resolved it in my mind, but not published the findings anywhere.)

**“There’s something wrong about the diffusion equation—but what exactly is it?” **

In this post, I re-explain some parts the argument from my paper. Also, I cite further references. [^]

(Top [ ↑ ] )

## 5. CFD code snippets in Python:

A series of posts published here. All carry Python scripts (that work!). They together cover some part of the material that I used while teaching CFD at the UG level, at the GHRCEM, Wagholi, Pune:

**1D transient conduction, FTCS, Dirichlet BCs**: [^]**Transients in the Couette flow, Crank-Nicolson scheme**: [^]**First-order wave equation, first-order upwind scheme**: [^]

**“A small utility for blockMesh”**

Published here [^]. It implements a small little but neat idea of a metadata file for the blockMesh utility of OpenFOAM.

It can be improved a lot, and I don’t mean just XML-izing it. I mean some really useful additions to the functionality. Let me know if any one is interested in a joint research paper. (Must be able to code in Python.)

(Top [ ↑ ] )

## 6. The roots of the concept: space

I trace the meaning of the concept of space via a series of posts which I published at this blog. It’s rather epistemological in nature. Also, rather loosely written. But it carries several *new* ideas that are not found anywhere else:

**Getting going about “space”**: [^]. Extension and location are the two physically existing and perceptually evident attributes which lie at the base of the concept of space.**Shaping up space**: [^]. How extension is measured. Shape as a measure of extension.**Putting context of space in place**: [^]. The idea of a place is not given in the perceptual field, but is grasped at the conceptual level. An object in motion can have a definite place but it has no location. The geometrical point as a limiting value of small sizes.

(Top [ ↑ ] )

## 7. Physical referents of certain mathematical concepts:

**“Is the physical universe infinite?”**

A post published here [^]. I loosely discuss the epistemological nature of the problem.

**“Why do physicists use infinity?”**

A post published here: [^]. Essentially, they use the concept as a means of abstraction. I show in detail how.

**“What do physicists mean by ‘multidimensional’ physical reality?”**

A post published here: [^]. Essentially, the idea concerns a law concerning how the quantitative measures of certain characteristics (of physical objects) combine together. … They do so, via the cosine-projection law.

**“Why is the physical space 3-dimensional?”**

Published at this blog: [^]. I take a leisurely walk into one of the axioms of space. (Yes, that’s what I do, but you wouldn’t have ever believed that mathematics axioms could be grasped that easily.)

**“My small contribution towards the controversies surrounding the important question of “1, 2, 3, …””**

A post published here: [^]. By the time I wrote it, my understanding (as seen in the above essays) had improved a lot. In particular, here, I directly come to asserting that sizes exist metaphysically even if numbers don’t. I need to update this post and convert it into a PDF article. TBD. [sigh!]

**“How many numbers are there in the real number system?”**

A PDF note [^] and a loosely written post about it [^].

**“The fundamental physical bases of the WR Approach (and, consequently, of FEM) in general”**

A post published here [^]. To the best of my knowledge, I was the first to seek a physical meaning for the method of weighted residuals—the method at the base of FEM, the most widely used simulation method. The question occurred to me while I was teaching a course on FEM at COEP. It still remains an open question.

**“”Think It Over, and Then, Program!”… And, also, a bit on the calculus of variations…”**

A post published here: [^]. An *informed* rant, interspersed with a good solution. The approach I advocate actually works for me.

**“Some aspects of modeling with continua in physics and engineering sciences”**

A post published here: [^]. It provides an evidence of my struggle towards grasping a couple of ideas that so many people never come to grasp explicitly or in all generality. The two ideas are: (i) that a continuum is infinitely divisible (see also the post here [^]); and (ii) the novel point (towards which here I was struggling), viz., that the continuum also supports infinite separability of material points if they lie on different sides of a singular surface in the solution.

(Top [ ↑ ] )

## 8. Physical referents of ideas like locality, and the instantaneous action at a distance:

A series of posts on a foundational issue from physics, published at this blog. Extraordinarily important, from the view point of concepts like: instantaneous action at a distance (IAD), locality, causality, etc. The discussion here shows how many apparently nonsense ideas (like IAD) can also make sense when their discussion is anchored in a right way into the perceptual reality.

**Introducing a very foundational issue of physics (and of maths)**: [^]**The One vs. the Many**: [^]**Some of the implications of the “Many Objects” idea…**: [^]**Some of the implications of the “One Object” idea…**: [^]**Relating the One with the Many**: [^]

(Top [ ↑ ] )

## 9. Book reviews:

**“David Harriman’s “The Logical Leap”: grade “A” (but a qualified one, not straight)”**

A post published here: [^]. A great book on the theory of induction. Yet [in my today’s words] Harriman misses the point that sizes/magnitudes and their measures (like numbers/quantitative variables) are two *different* things. The former exist metaphysically, the latter are only man-conceived. His errors seem to spring from treating the two as identical.

**“One more recommendation for your holiday reading: Manjit Kumar’s “Quantum””**

A post published here: [^].

**“A nice little book on mathematics for biologists—and for the rest of us!”**

A post published here: [^].

**“A little about “Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics””**

A post published here, way back in August, 2009 (about 9 years ago, before even my PhD defence took place). [^]. I today (on 07 August 2018) re-read it, and was startled to find that despite all the changes in my positions since then, how, on some *crucial* essentials, I have always remained so consistent!

(Top [ ↑ ] )

## 10. Micro-level water-resources engineering:

A series of posts published here:

- My the-then loose thoughts while launching a research in this topic. [^].
- A collection of links to portals and other references: [^]
- A discussion of the geology of Maharashtra and its implications: [^]
- A Python script to estimate the volume of water stored in a toy model of a series of check-dams: [^]
- A discussion of the runoff calculations, and a Python script for the same: [^]
- The importance of evaporation: [^]

(Top [ ↑ ] )

## 11. Academia:

**“Are the recent CS graduates from India that bad?”**

My loose thoughts on the topic, published at this blog: [^]

**“They don’t even touch a good text-book!”**

A post published here: [^]. I demonstrate (with an Excel worksheet) how vacuous professors’ expectations are.

**“M Tech (Mech.) admissions—an open letter to COEP authorities”**

A post published here, in June 2008: [^]. It was expected that it would fall on deaf ears. It did.

(Top [ ↑ ] )

## 12. Philosophy of mind; ancient Indian wisdom; spirituality:

**“Am I an Objectivist?”**

Published at this blog: [^]

**“What is the soul?”**

Published at this blog: [^]

**“(A)theism, God, and Soul”**

Published at this blog: [^]. Also has some commentary on the etymology of some Sanskrit terms like “divya”.

**“Translation seen as an exacting process”**

Published at this blog: [^]. I show, with a concrete example, how bad philosophical positions or a poor epistemology can subtly distort the usual English translations of the ancient Sanskrit verses. I take the example of the famous “tamaso maa jyotirgamay.”

**“punashcha hari: om”**

Published at this blog: [^]. I again look at the meaning of the Sanskrit phrase in the title.

(Top [ ↑ ] )

## 13. Miscellaneous (mechanics-related topics):

**“Yo—2: The eminent bumpiness of the “non-analytic” mathematics”**

Published at this blog [^]. Most engineers would not be able to name even just one non-analytic function. Here, I discuss one example well known to the physics and maths people.

**“MWR for the first- and third-order differential equations” **

An open question posted at iMechanica: [^].

Also see another, related post (mentioned above), here [^]. As far as I know, this second question, too, remains open even as of today.

**“When will a stiffness matrix become non-symmetric?”**

My answer and further discussion regarding this question at iMechanica: [^] and [^]

**“Those were not waves: A bit historical re. Huygens’ principle”**

A post published at iMechanica: [^]

**“FEM is not a local method (and it isn’t global either)”**

A post published at iMechanica: [^]. Also, at this blog [^].

**“Are linear and angular momenta interconvertible?”**

A post published at iMechanica: [^]. Also see another post, published here: [^]

**“Conservation of angular momentum isn’t [very] fundamental!”**

A post published here; refers to a post by Chad Orzel: [^]

**“A note on stereology”**

A post published at iMechanica: [^]

**“About Newton’s laws”**

A comment posted at a thread at iMechanica: [^]

**On “Causality”**

A comment I initially made at Roger Schlafly’s blog, and then published here [^]

**“An interesting problem from the classical mechanics of vibrations”**

A post published here [^]

(Top [ ↑ ] )

## 14. Miscellaneous (other topics):

**“An idea on visualization of cultural contexts”**

A post published here, in August 2008: [^]. The idea has since then come to be followed in several YouTube video’s etc. (I didn’t have the money to file for a patent.)

(Top [ ↑ ] )

**Page History:**

- First published: 06 August 2018, 15:51 IST
- Additions made: 07 August 2018
- Revised with additions: 01 January 2020, 20:12 IST